No. I just want you to answer my questions from above. Have you read the book? Such a document does not exist, to my best knowledge, and if you have been reading my 1,000 posts, you would know that I do have a knowledge. A real one. But maybe I am wrong, if you could show me that such document existed. Probably, it didn't. If such a document existed, you would have known the Wikipedia URL of it, it would have been in your favorites. I hope that this thread lets you learn more about yourself and your lack of ability to critically read information. You believe everything you want to believe, and reject everything you don't want to believe. in both case, the facts and evidence are not a factor in your decision if to adopt or reject an idea/information. This is what religious people do.
You said you have PhD in physics, you said many things about how great your education was, you said many things about knowledge but all were showing you have little knowledge, a very simple proof is in intensively quoting wikipedia when all real academics do not see it as a reliable source of information, yeah it might be good to give you an idea about a topic, but it is never a reliable source, not even to the co-founder of wikipedia lol the book is real yes, you can purchase it online, you can also read about S.D. Goitein, it is a shame really that you are there in the so-called Israel and never heard about this man, and his field of studies, at least, go read some about him on wikipedia, it will give you an idea.
Imad, admit the simple fact: "To make a point, I used a document which I know nothing about, not even sure that it existed." YOU know nothing about the document. you get it? YOU. The academic spirit of the 21th century dictates that in this case, you are NOT ALLOWED to use it to make any arguments, before you know what u're talking about or at least make sure that it even exists. you understand? The book is real. But where did you find that the document in mentioned in this book? The authors of the book didn't write it, right? so who did? what is their reference? You do know nothing about the document you were talking about, don't you? You didn't answer even a single question regarding the document which stands in the core of your argument. It could have been "the protocols of the elders of zion" or any other antisemitic lie that you would have googled up, and post it like its a fact. you remind me now exactly the funny Arabs from the funny youtube I like to post, speaking of "zionist party of Switzerland"... and so on.... The tragedy of the middle east - the ignorant Arab crowds. You are one of them Imad.
lol what is hard for you to understand, the quote is real, so is the document, among so many other documents this prof was studying, from that book, on page 63, under chapter 5 named "5 THE ACTUAL AND LEGAL POSITION OF THE JEWS UNDER ARAB ISLAM" again, re-read my previous post Chaos, why are you ignoring the so obvious for the not so obvious, forget about all quotes, and speak your point directly if you have enough courage, are you saying that Jews were treated badly under Islamic rule? is this what you are trying to imply? what is next, will you ask me now if I personally hear so-called Israel president saying:
not relevant, as always, we are speaking about the document. (I also wonder how jews praising Islam can relate with "legal position of the jews under arab islam") How do you know that the book tells about the document on page 63, chapter 5? have you read the book? (lol) Could you scan the page and send it over? The two authors didn't find the document in their back yard, right? so according to them, how do they know about the document? Imad. You know nothing about the document. Stop shitting us. One doesn't have to be a genius to know that you speak about a document you know nothing about. In a debate, what you did is a "no go". You understand? probably not. It makes you unworthy to debate with. Because next time you could use alladin or little red riding hood to make a point. Me? I would have never posted that link that you googled up. Not before I would have cross checked to verify that it is not a lie. You see the difference between me and you, which is quite the difference between Israel and the Arabs? As far as i'm concerned, no such document exists, until you prove otherwise. I am talking about a real proof. not "islamic proof". I really want to learn more about the document. Teach me Imad. To have a real proof, I need you to answer all (or most) of the list of questions in my previous posts regarding the document. Too much 21th century for you? I'm sorry. At least make a try. They were treated better than the under the Christians. But this is still not "good treatment". "treated badly" is more like it. Just read your posts and see how it continues....but we discussed that already Imad. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiraz_blood_libel <--- one of 100's links I can post here. I mean, at least a hundred. you understand? Don't make me.
How do I know about the quote? lol, you often found quotes from books, mentioning the source, with page number, right? let's get out of this narrow circle, about this single book and quote, you try to keep the discussion around it only, so yeah, I take your challenge (was it a challenge?), post these 100's links you spoke about, 5 each time, quotes, whatever link, proof, that say Jews were treated badly under Islamic rule, and for each link you post, I will post 2 that say Jews were treated well, and all from non-Muslim sources if you quoted wikipedia, make sure to include the original source, do not for example tell me that this quote is from wikipedia, all sources used on wikipedia are listed at the bottom of the page, so get the original source. Edit: And before you start, please start a thread specifically for that topic, enough diverting here, and wasting the main topic of the thread, you can name it anything you want, like Jews under Islam, will be good for you to build quotes and references there if you want me to start it, just say it
So, where did you find it? How did you connect between the mysterious document and this book, page 63, chapter 5? No. Not before you say, "I'm sorry. I am really not sure that such a document exists. I know nothing about the specifics of such document. It was probably (another) lie on (another) ridiculous Islamic site, the kind that I read for information". Here, an example on how to make the right thing. http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=13378158&postcount=12
man you are so boring, are you saying now I lied, and this document does not exist, or this quote is not mentioned in that book? I do not have the book, to scan the page for you, this is why you insist on me to scan that page for you, to try to convince readers that Jews been treated badly? the document is mentioned in the book, in that place I told you about, the book and the quote are also mentioned in the Canadian Institute for Jewish research: you left all the thread, and wasted so many posts about this specific document, really Chaos? again, the book is real, and the document is real, and you can check yourself, I did not lie as you did, and I did not make a mistake to apologize for it, you are the one who should apologize for trying to imply that I use unreal info in my posts when I do not I will be waiting your apology STOP trying to distract the discussion, and concentrate it on this point, speaking about sites designs, then museums, then wikipedia then do not know what else, as I told you, if you want to say that Jews were treated badly under Islam, go ahead and start a thread about it, post your proofs there, and invite me to reply, will be more than glad to post there. edit: geez, you are so boring Chaos, I forgot the source for the above quote, here it is and for the chapter name and page number 63, here it is, but notice, you need to signup for the free trial to be able to read, you can read some pages though from the book without having to signup: here is the link: Jews and Arabs: Their Contacts through the Ages
oh, so its that book and not the other? you seem to be very fond of Goitein. If he wrote a book that muhamed is the true prophet, that you would have REALLY adored him. For now, he's just "jewish", as you said In the canadian website there is no reference except for saying "widely disseminated Jewish document of the late Umayyad period". I didn't sign up to read page 63. They want my credit card number. Are you sure that you did read it? So at least we "know" now that we're talking about the Umayyad period.... makes sense, you still live in that period... . But perhaps you would like to read their closing argument, the last paragraph, and say: "oops"? So far: I still didn't get a proof that such a document existed. I would really like to know more history. Convince me that this is history, and not Islamic junk, and I will thank you. What was written in this document? who wrote it? where was it written? why did he write it? did it survive to this very day? Besides, were there 'widely circulated documents' at all in the 7th century at all? before print? when most people were unalphabet, even the "prophet"? until then, this document is another junk you found on another junk Islamic website, and now can't really explain what you are talking about. Everybody can see this, except for yourself. I focus now on the document. Its existence does not prove anything, especially that now I know that its from the 7th century, whereas the main persecutions of jews by muslims were done 1,000 years later. But, its inexistence (which is probably the case) do prove and illustrate how easy you post every junk you find as "proof" without even knowing what u're talking about. For you, its a lose-lose situation. But this is the hole that you digged for yourself......
I m sure anything that exists and violates your propaganda is of no value for you, it does not mean the same for these profs, else they would not include it in their work and waste years of study on such stuff. it does exist, as been proved, but its inexistence for you despite it exists, is a "proof" that you are willing to accuse anybody of lying, even if he is a prof that got awards, like the author of this book, and you say your are PhD?
No, just in this case, since all massacres and persecutions of jews occured much after the ummayad period. so the document would be irelevant, no? in the umayyad period and later, the muslims were OK. Their deterioration started in the 17th century from a leading culture to a joke. No. It has not been proven. If this is enough for you for a "proof", no wonder that you believe in all this ridiculous stuff that you do -> where the "proof" is similar. The award and my phD are irrelevant. The specifics of this document, which are not known to you because such a document does not exist, are the only things which are relevant. Tell me something about the document Imad. forget about the rest. Who wrote it? What was written there (full text in full context)? How did the document come to the knowledge of the authors of this book? These are simple questions that when speaking of any other document that REALLY EXISTS (i.e. Balfour declaration) can be easily answered. So far, for an intellectual who is interested in real history and tries to stay away from lies, this document does not exist. Its not just me, its the 21th century -> and its philosophy on how to gain real knowledge.
The topic in case you failed to know, was about Islam/Qur'an ordering Muslims to hate Jews, I will go along with your claim, but it presents some new questions, how come Islam treated Jews well, till much after Umayyad period as you say, then started to treat them bad? did Islam or Qur'an change? I do not think so, because Chaos the PhD said: it has been proved Chaos, try to get over it
Actually, it was about the Gazans help to Haiti. At least from the video taken in somebody's backyard and broadcast only on "Euronews". Here, you would just love this article: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/s...d-hospital-in-haiti-anti-zionists-not-fooled/ That's a good question. My answer would be the deterioration of the Islamic culture which started in the 17th century, and ended up with videos like "you gotta love these guys" I posted in the other thread. Before the deterioration, there were muslim scholars who were into science (great achievements), philosophy, architecture. Today, they are only into the quran. The emergence of the fundamentalist Islam (you know what fundamentalist mean?) is the cause for this. In other words: once, Islam was like Judaism, just another religion: where its believers have the quran in one hand and the pen in the other hand. An allegorical religion (look for allegory in wikipedia). Today, the muslims have the quran in both hands, and don't care about anything else. For example, if they read baseless bullshit in an Islamic website they defend it without having the minimum intellectual capabilities to say: "hey, I know what a real document is, a single-line quote from a 'widespread' 'jewish' document on which nothing is known but this single line quote is utter bullshit" No physics in Kuwait, a filthy rich country, right? as I showed you once. But once there was. Why? ---> new Islam. No women driving in Saudi Arabia. You think that in the 15th century, something like that would have been thinkable?
Glad that you noticed what is the thread's topic. indeed it is a good question, a better question, is why some still insist on attacking Islam? nobody has any authority to change even a letter in Qur'an. I say the contrary, some non-Muslims are so eager to cahnge Qur'an so it would tolerate aggressors, nope, you have the bible, where it says turn the right cheek, but to keep peace, aggressors should not be left alone practicing their aggressions.
Never I said that letters in the qur'an should be changed. what is "attacking Islam"? why would you care so much if one attacks Islam? Is Islam = Imad and Imad = Islam ? You see, I really like evolution and big bang theories, and I really wouldn't if everyone will attack it all day long. Its their problem. How is "Islam" different? because god and his prophet have gentle souls and take the insults personally? If I find in the quran "do not make friends with the jews and christians", and I say: "the quran says, 'do not make friends with the jews and christians'", is this considered as an attack on Islam? Or maybe, the Quran who says "In their (the unbelievers) minds there is a disease. [2:10]" is actually attacking me? you know, self-defense, we in Israel like to say that.
yadda yadda yadda.. when you are broke, you start with this quote from Qur'an despite its been discussed in boring details on these forums here and here and here and here and many other places where you were participating anything new, something about the thread topic for example?
Back to the topic (I hope) a good article about this specific topic been published in haaretz, by Akiva Eldar, read it here: Akiva Eldar: Israel’s compassion in Haiti can’t hide our ugly face in Gaza some interesting comparisons he makes in his article, like how Israeli reporters rush to cover the new about the Israeli humanitarian aid to Haiti: with and and.. another comparison: with natural vs. man-made with medical: with .... with
Here is a sentence in Eldar's article that you didn't quote: Imad, in case you haven't heard, the Palestinians, are in an ethnic/national conflict with Israel. Some of them, including yourself, a-priori reject Israel's right to exist and hate the jewish people. Drawing a line between Israel's help to Haiti and Israel's help to the Palestinians (or the rightful lack thereof), or expecting Israel to help the Palestinians as it helps the Haitians, the Turks, the Greek, and anybody else whom we have helped before a lot, is simply idiotic. And I like this: Every country's journalist rush to cover their own help to the Haitians, a matter of national pride and self-back-scratching. You showed me the jordanian and the Qatar ones. However, the Israeli delegation did something unique - I think that it was the only international help that received worldwide coverage. It was the only one to set a large-scale hospital on site with two fully equipped operation rooms. For us, this is natural, I didn't feel an urge to start a thread about it. You did, of course, with a video photographed in someone's backyard in Gaza, not forgetting to use the opportunity to mention the "Israeli crimes", of course.
and here it is again with the part you did not quote: and more important than this, is your failure to mention, that the siege was not originally because of Qassams rockets, it started before that, since Hamas won elections in Gaza, and even before that when Arafat was alive. So to try to say that this is because the rockets, is not quiet accurate, but more accurate to say that the rockets are a response of the siege, and the oppression, occupation, that started long ago, even before Hamas was established.
I find the mechanisms in your brain that make you automatically "interpret" history in a way which is totally unrelated with reality very interesting. They are in many fields and here is another example. In the single elections that took place, Hamas got 44% of the votes. Fatah got 41% of the votes. In any normal nation, this would mean a government which is Hamas+Fatah. But not with the Palestinians....: "Hamas won elections in Gaza" is in your Islamic fairytale language. In history language it should be: "Hamas took control of Gaza by the force of the gun, persecuted all of its political rivals, and turned the Sharia to the official law system in Gaza". Hamas killed 1,000 Palestinians so far directly since those elections, and is responsible for another 1,000 Palestinian victims, most of them terrorists but unfortunately some are not, that fell during Israel's self-defense operation. I'm not even mentioning the Israeli children, I know that their lives are invaluable to you, even less than the no-value of your own people. This is the reality Imad, not the nice sentences flying in your brain that can not cope with reality. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOPfia8Dx5k <-- look Bassam in the eyes. Imad. Pathetic.